Morgan face-to-face: 58-42 to Coalition; Seat of the week: Eden-Monaro
The latest Morgan face-to-face poll, conducted last week from a sample of 893, shows a slight improvement for Labor, up 1.5% to 32% on the primary vote with the Coalition down half a point to 45.5% and the Greens down 1.5% to 10.5%. This translates into a one point improvement on the respondent-allocated two-party preferred measure, from 59-48 to 58-42, and a half-point improvement on the previous election method, down from 55.5-44.5 to 55-45.
UPDATE (28/5/12): Essential Research has Labor losing one of the points on two-party preferred it clawed back over previous weeks, the result now at 57-43. Primary votes are 50% for the Coalition (up one), 33% for Labor (steady) and 10% for the Greens (steady). Other questions gauged views on the parties’ respective “attributes”, with all negative responses for Labor (chiefly “divided” and “will promise anything to win votes”) rating higher than all positives, and the Liberal Party doing rather better, rating well for “moderate” and “understands the problems facing Australia”. Bewilderingly, only slightly more respondents (35%) were willing to rate the state of the economy as “good” than “bad” (29%), with 33% opting for neither, although 43% rated the position of their household satisfactory against 28% unsatisfactory.
In today’s installment of Seat of the Week, it’s everybody’s favourite:
Seat of the week: Eden-Monaro
Taking in the south-eastern corner of New South Wales, including Queanbeyan, Cooma, Tumut and the coast from Batemans Bay south to Eden and the Victorian border, Eden-Monaro is renowned throughout the land as the seat that goes with the party who wins the election. Until 2007 its record as a bellwether was in fact surpassed by Macarthur, which had gone with the winning party at every election since its creation in 1949, but while Eden-Monaro stayed true to form by being among the seven New South Wales seats to switch to Labor with the election of the Rudd government, Liberal member Pat Farmer held on in Macarthur. The seat bucked the statewide trend in 2010 by recording a 2.0% swing to Labor, in what was very likely a vote of confidence in the popular local member, Mike Kelly.
Perhaps explaining its bellwether status, Eden-Monaro offers something of a microcosm of the state at large, if not the entire country. It incorporates suburban Queanbeyan, rural centres Cooma and Bega, coastal towns Eden and Narooma, and agricultural areas sprinkled with small towns. Labor’s strongest area is the electorate is the Canberra satellite town of Queanbeyan, excluding its Liberal-leaning outer suburb of Jerrabomberra. The coastal areas, which swung particularly heavily to Labor in 2007, can be divided between a finely balanced centre and areas of Liberal strength at the northern and southern extremities, respectively around Batemans Bay and Merimbula. The smaller inland towns are solidly conservative, but Cooma is highly marginal. The area covered by the electorate has been remarkably little changed over the years: it has been locked into the state’s south-eastern corner since federation, and its geographic size has remained fairly consistent as increases in the size of parliament cancelled out the effects of relative population decline. Outside of the interruption from 2007 and 2010, when it expanded westwards to Tumut and Tumbarumba, its boundaries since 1998 have been almost identical to those it had before 1913.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Election 2013, Federal Politics 2010-
ShowsON
About the extent of low intelligence,can only do up to five letter words,a real creidt to his Mother.
by Schnappi on May 27, 2012 at 9:57 pm
my say @ 4868
Gee my say, take it easy, don’t you remember someone go banned for referring to you as a ‘silly old bat’?
William might not appreciate your self deprecating humour and ban you.
by bemused on May 27, 2012 at 9:57 pm
Tom Paine
Can you please please explain your thought process in June 2010. It might shut the mob up for once.
I realise it is OK to change your mind but these one eyed monsters lack the wit. Please help.
by daretotread on May 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm
HHAHAHAAHAHAHAHH THE CODGER TOLD YOU TO READ THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, AND YOU THINK THAT IS SOMETHING TO BE PROUD OF?
THE WSJ MAKES THE AUSTRALIAN’S COVERAGE OF ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS LOOK SANE!
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Ctmomma
I think the pool Labor selects its pollies from is too small and there are plenty of nurses who have run hospitals etc who could run departments.
by Diogenes on May 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Diogenes @ 4864:
It was the highpoint of Brandis’ career
by fiona on May 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm
daretoread:
Rudd’s name-calling of his colleagues shows him as the juvenile he is, utterly unfit for leadership.
Real leaders unite their team (like Gillard has done), whereas Rudd simply divided it. Management 101.
You can keep defending Rudd’s appalling behaviour all you like. But when people ask you why you stand by misogynistic comments, don’t come sooking to me complaining of the nasty PB commenters who won’t tolerate your bigoted assertions.
by confessions on May 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm
n2t
The global trend is that fresh water is costing more and will cost more. The reasons, thinking about supply and demand, are:
(1) more people means that there is less water pp
(2) a move up the energy chain in food consumption means a move up the chain in implied water use pp
(3) fossil water is being depleted at an enormous rate
(4) energy costs (building dams, pumping water around, purifiying it, desalizing it, etc, etc,) are going up.
In the federated states of Australia, desperado state governments are taxing water more and more (utility ‘dividends’). But that is just the cream on the cake of (1) through (4).
by Boerwar on May 27, 2012 at 9:59 pm
Showsy,
Seeing as I have explained it on a number of occaissions, I can only conclude that the chronic lack of understanding of basic concepts on your part is your problem. Not that I’m saying you’re stupid or demented or unstable………
Actually, I am.
by Greensborough Growler on May 27, 2012 at 10:00 pm
You #ELIdioto, that painful pavlovian doggy dont have a mind to change with.
by The Finnigans on May 27, 2012 at 10:00 pm
Schnappi,
Don’t feed SO.
Please…
by fiona on May 27, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Dreyfus was a prominent Q.C. in Victoria before Hawke helped him get pre-selected.
Kelly was Australia’s most senior military lawyer in Iraq. In fact I believe he is currently the only person in the federal parliament with any military service. There are others that were in the ADF, like Stuart Robert, but never served in action.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Good night all.
by Boerwar on May 27, 2012 at 10:02 pm
Ha true! I remember all the times he tried to present bills to the House and just failed completely. The clerk would have to tell him what to say and he just repeated it.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:03 pm
The day the Rudd Cult jumped the shark.
by confessions on May 27, 2012 at 10:04 pm
Confessions
I have made No misogynist comments. I dislike the level of pathological hatred for Rudd and the cruelty with which he has been treated by many including your good self.
Not sure that it is misogynist. In fact it clearly is not.
I think you lack human empathy. Offensive to you perhaps but not in any way misogynist
by daretotread on May 27, 2012 at 10:04 pm
SNIP: Unpleasant comment deleted – The Management.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:04 pm
Good night Boerwar.
by confessions on May 27, 2012 at 10:04 pm
rishane Posted Sunday, May 27, 2012 at 9:54 pm | Permalink
Also, this would seem kinda pertinent:
nevso @nevso
#Ch7′s @SarahWiley8 admits she invented “lost faith in JGillard” story on Joel Fitzgibbon. Shameful that MSM followed her lead #auspol
RISane, is this , this evening
by my say on May 27, 2012 at 10:04 pm
ShowsON
Does your mother know your still up,a real credit to her,think you have sunk as low as you can go,have scrolled past your rubbish,but your filth from your dull filthy unenlighted mind,is the last look I for one will comment about your peabrain.
by Schnappi on May 27, 2012 at 10:05 pm
Shows On got his name in Hansard. Listen to Craig Tomson speech .
Hate mail.
by Pipe Fitter on May 27, 2012 at 10:05 pm
rishane,
Is that a recent post. Wiley admitted a month ago that she didn’t actually hear the quote. But, that she got it second hand from a “very” reliable source.
by Greensborough Growler on May 27, 2012 at 10:06 pm
Shows On lets take a big sip of the Kevin Rudd Kool-Aid and speculate what would happen to Labor if Rudd returned, Wayne Swan World’s Best Treasurer would go to the back bench and so would Julia Gillard, Penny Wong, Peter Garrett and others would have to go as well.
It would split Labor, it’s just crazy.
Tony Abbott is seen as a bully, the PM needs to get out reinforce this perception, Albos comment “Self indulgent, blood lust for power that we see from this megalomaniac opposite,” is spot on, she needs a Latham moment when he squeezed Little Johnny Howards hand, get the bully to lash out by calling him weak and to gutless to have a debate on TV, challenge his masculinity.
by Seasprite on May 27, 2012 at 10:06 pm
Thank you for reminding everyone that I am in Hansard which people can read in Hansard.
But you are mistaking assuming that I was mentioned in Hansard during Craign Thomson’s speech in Hansard. Hansard will show that this is erroneous.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:07 pm
So is there any credible evidence that Pyne met with Lawler?
Or it the usual gusface stuff, like last weekend when he said there would be MOAR that night that would lead to Pyne resigning.
by bluegreen on May 27, 2012 at 10:08 pm
Schnappi
To be honest I’m not surprised he reacted that way considering this
by Tom Hawkins on May 27, 2012 at 10:09 pm
bluegreen,
Apparently there is that story and another. Both by IA but the second is being run with another bigger media outlet.
by Space Kidette on May 27, 2012 at 10:09 pm
That Sarah Wiley beat up incident (where are first it was “from him”, then from a “source”) was at the start of May. Some people on twitter are currently attacking her for it after that Turnleft article got recirculated, and some of them seem to be stupidly getting it mixed up with the new Fitzgibbon beat up and blaming her for that.
by Leroy on May 27, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Swan going to the back bench would be a good thing. His treatment of Rudd during the Feb leadership spill was just horrendous. Whatever he thought about Rudd he was attacking a former Labor Prime Minister of Australia. I see no problem with him saying “I will vote for Julia Gillard”, but for him to put out a press release comprehensively trashing Rudd AS A PERSON demonstrated was just a shocking dog act for a Labor PM to do.
Sorry, but when there are $250,000 p.a. cabinet jobs up for grabs, you will see most of these MPs sticking around for them.
It would be their duty to unify behind Rudd in the interests of THE PARTY, you know, not in Wayne Swan’s interests, but in the interest of the PARTY.
WTF? When Latham did that to Howard it just reinforced perceptions that Latham was a bit nuts, it didn’t help him at all.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:11 pm
bg,
There were a couple of tweets earlier today that Pyne, Jackson and Lawler had been seen having coffee in the last couple of weeks.
Until confirmed it’s a classified as a possible sighting.
I remember the Libs ran rampant that Keating was gay when he was spotted having a meal with his teenage son some years ago.
by Greensborough Growler on May 27, 2012 at 10:11 pm
I thought one of the most telling moments of the whole February challenge was when Gillard released journalists from the obligation to keep any ‘backgrounding’ reports private, and Rudd refused to do the same.
by rishane on May 27, 2012 at 10:11 pm
My mother is dead.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:11 pm
good
her bed, she can lie in it
Why would they HAVE to go?
by bluegreen on May 27, 2012 at 10:12 pm
No there isn’t. All there is so far are “reports” which the Independent Australia twitter account hasn’t bothered to actually release.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:12 pm
The Finnigans @ 4909
You are truly the most vacuous poster on this blog.
by bemused on May 27, 2012 at 10:13 pm
I am confused about which story is which
by bluegreen on May 27, 2012 at 10:13 pm
ShowsOn
One last time definately final,so is mine but filth like you defile all Mothers alive or dead,your still scum.
by Schnappi on May 27, 2012 at 10:14 pm
It is classified as rumour mongering, which if News Ltd had done people here would be screaming their heads off.
What if some news Ltd hack on Twitter tweeted “Reports that Julia Gillard had lunch with Craig Thomson”, without actually backing it up with any evidence?
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:14 pm
Tom Hawkins,
Showsy can’t handle the truth, I’m afraid.
by Greensborough Growler on May 27, 2012 at 10:14 pm
You have in the past said that childless women have no real policy understanding of the issues faced by parents. As if anyone who’s ever legislated in favour of those with disabiilities is getting around in a wheelchair, of with a seeing eye dog.
Defend Rudd’s sexism if you want. It only reflects poorly on you in the end.
by confessions on May 27, 2012 at 10:14 pm
The first story is about confirmation of the Pyne coffee date and the second I don’t yet know.
by Space Kidette on May 27, 2012 at 10:15 pm
SNIP: Unpleasant comment deleted – The Management.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:15 pm
rishane
Yep – I think that put to bed the who was ‘backgrounding’ who story.
by CTar1 on May 27, 2012 at 10:15 pm
SNIP: Unpleasant comment deleted – The Management.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:16 pm
This is just a rumour, there is no evidence it is true.
by ShowsOn on May 27, 2012 at 10:17 pm
Showsy,
One thing you can’t hide, is when you’re crippled inside.
Lennon got you perfectly.
by Greensborough Growler on May 27, 2012 at 10:19 pm
Tsk, Shows.
Last night you were talking about how unnecessary commas were.
by zoomster on May 27, 2012 at 10:19 pm
I don’t think any story is coming out re a coffee date with Pyne/Lawler/Jackson. Just a rumour, and with no photo taken, so what?
However IA have said that an MSM TV Station in interested in material from one of their articles, so I’m guessing that the primary documents showing Jackson dodgy expenses and other things may get a run, as they should. Other stuff is harder to prove, but might get an airing, or at least the Lawler/Jackson relationship.
by Leroy on May 27, 2012 at 10:20 pm
Waiting for Kevin
BLUDGER #1:
Charming spot. Inspiring comments. Let’s go.
BLUDGER #2:
We can’t.
BLUDGER #1:
Why not?
BLUDGER #2:
We’re waiting for Kevin.
BLUDGER #1:
(despairingly). Ah! (Pause.) You’re sure it was here?
BLUDGER #2:
What?
BLUDGER #1:
That we were to wait.
BLUDGER #2:
He said at Poll Bludger. Do you see any others?
BLUDGER #1:
What is it?
BLUDGER #2:
I don’t know. A psephology site.
BLUDGER #1:
Where are the statistics?
BLUDGER #2:
They must be old.
BLUDGER #1:
No new polling.
BLUDGER #2:
Or perhaps it’s not the season.
BLUDGER #1:
Looks to me more like a forum.
BLUDGER #2:
A blog.
BLUDGER #1:
A forum.
BLUDGER #2:
A—. What are you insinuating? That we’ve come to the wrong place?
BLUDGER #1:
He should be here.
BLUDGER #2:
He didn’t say for sure he’d rise.
BLUDGER #1:
And if he doesn’t rise?
BLUDGER #2:
We’ll come back tomorrow.
BLUDGER #1:
And then the day after tomorrow.
BLUDGER #2:
Possibly.
BLUDGER #1:
And so on.
BLUDGER #2:
The point is—
BLUDGER #1:
Until he rises.
BLUDGER #2:
You’re merciless.
BLUDGER #1:
We came here yesterday.
BLUDGER #2:
Ah no, there you’re mistaken.
BLUDGER #1:
What did we do yesterday?
BLUDGER #2:
What did we do yesterday?
BLUDGER #1:
Yes.
BLUDGER #2:
Why . . . (Angrily.) Nothing is certain when you’re about.
BLUDGER #1:
In my opinion we were here.
BLUDGER #2:
(looking round). You recognize the conversation?
BLUDGER #1:
I didn’t say that.
BLUDGER #2:
Well?
BLUDGER #1:
That makes no difference.
BLUDGER #2:
All the same . . . (looking about) that comment . . . (scrolling back) that abuse . . .
BLUDGER #1:
You’re sure it was this evening?
BLUDGER #2:
What?
BLUDGER #1:
That we were to wait.
BLUDGER #2:
He said Saturday. (Pause.) I think.
BLUDGER #1:
You think.
BLUDGER #2:
I must have made a note of it. (He fumbles in his bookmark folder, bursting with miscellaneous rubbish.)
BLUDGER #1:
(very insidious). But what Saturday? And is it Saturday? Is it not rather Sunday? (Pause.) Or Monday? (Pause.) Or Friday?
BLUDGER #2:
It’s not possible!
BLUDGER #1:
Or Thursday?
BLUDGER #2:
What’ll we do?
BLUDGER #1:
If he rose yesterday and we weren’t here you may be sure he won’t rise again today.
BLUDGER #2:
But you say we were here yesterday.
BLUDGER #1:
I may be mistaken. (Pause.) Let’s stop posting for a minute, do you mind?
BLUDGER #2:
(feebly). All right. (Bludger #1 daydreams at his desk. Bludger #2 scrolls agitatedly to and fro, halting from time to time to gaze into previous threads. Bludger #1 loses interest. Bludger #2 posts a comment in capital letters.) KEVIN! . . . KEVIN! . . . KEVIN!
Bludger #1 resumes with a start.
BLUDGER #1:
(restored to the horror of his situation). I was dreaming! (Despairingly.) Why will you never let me rest?
BLUDGER #2:
I felt lonely.
BLUDGER #1:
I had a dream.
BLUDGER #2:
Don’t tell me!
BLUDGER #1:
I dreamt that—
BLUDGER #2:
DON’T TELL ME!
BLUDGER #1:
(gesture toward the current thread). This one is enough for you? (Silence.) It’s not nice of you. Who am I to tell my private nightmares to if I can’t tell them to you?
BLUDGER #2:
Let them remain private. You know I can’t bear that.
BLUDGER #1:
(coldly.) There are times when I wonder if it wouldn’t be better for us to part.
BLUDGER #2:
You wouldn’t go far.
{With apologies to Samuel Beckett}
by NormanK on May 27, 2012 at 10:20 pm
ha ha ha Auntie Jack, that was meant for you as well
by The Finnigans on May 27, 2012 at 10:21 pm